The Globe and Mail editorial is a stunning contradiction of logic today.
The title of the editorial is Mandatory Minimums Myth and starts off by saying that minimum sentencing (which the Conservative government favours) doesn’t work:
- “1988 parliamentary committee recommended against creating new mandatory minimum sentences”
- “there is no reliable evidence that the average scofflaw ponders sentencing ranges”
- “what is known is that mandatory minimum cause prison populations to swell and handcuff judges”
- “appellate courts exist to correct errors”
But then adds:
- “mandatory minimum sentences ought to apply only to a small number of very serious offences, including some that involve the use of firearms”
Only at the Globe… (see editorial here)
February 15, 2010 at 9:57 AM
For openers, consider:
1.] MAXIMUM TIME of “quarantine / isolation / incapacitaion through incarceration.”
2.] Loss of civil rights / liberties.
3.] MANDATORY participation in any and all appropriate Rehab programs.
4.] NO REMOTE CHANCE OF RELEASE until proof of rehab and ability to re-enter society as a productive self supporting citizen, with restoration of all benefits.
tj
t.e.&o.e.
February 15, 2010 at 10:12 AM
TangoJuliette YES, YES!
February 15, 2010 at 10:42 AM
Yeah for overbearing police state? Mandatory mins aren’t so much the problem as what they are used for. They may have a place for real crimes like murder but not false ones like drug possession.
February 15, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Does incarceration work, that is does it discourage criminals. Two possible answers, if you think it doesn’t work you must answer the Question; Have you ever been incarcerated? If your answer is NO then you have not the faintest idea what it feels like when your cell door clangs shut behind you and you hear the very large key levering the lock on your cell door shut. If you are lucky you are the only one in the cell. Today you could well be sharing every aspect of life with two to four very unknown quantities, hopefully they will stay that way. I will say if you have been there you don’t want to go back there, if you haven’t been there you have no idea what in hell you are talking about. Simply put Jail is scary, losing all free will is hard to explain, you will eat ,sleep and defecate by the numbers. Time takes on a whole new meaning. Does incarceration work? Yes two ways, the felon is removed from the community unable to commit further crime. Looking at 2 back to back (two years definite, two years indefinite) would keep a loaded gun out of a lot of peoples possession, especially if it was mandatory, no deals. No two or three for one in detention which only delays the trial and clogs the courts.
To summarize Adam Smith a Scot who said two hundred years ago,” Mercy to the Guilty is Cruelty to the innocent”
February 15, 2010 at 3:03 PM
Which firearm offences, those of legal gun oweners or those of thugs that buy them with drug money?
February 15, 2010 at 9:07 PM
Bizarre. Good catch.